Sometime between 1887 and 1888 Charles had moved the family into 1 Evelyn Terrace, Cranley Gardens, and Grace married from that address. It is unlikely that he kept on the house in Sydenham for any length of time as, by the 1891 census, Armitage Lodge in Sydenham had other occupants.
Although Evelyn Terrace was a ‘smaller’ property, it was big enough for a couple and seven children. It looks as though their previous residence in Hill Street, opposite Harrods, which had been kept on after the family had moved to Esher, was sold when they moved into Evelyn Terrace. The exact date for the move to Evelyn Terrace is not clear. James Weightman, who is a Harrod cousin, owns a Bible which belonged to Charles Digby, and which was signed and dated by him in December 1888, giving his address as Evelyn Terrace, Cranley Gardens.
No. 1 Evelyn Terrace is in Kensington, now between the Old Brompton Road and Fulham Road, and about 1 mile from the shop. It would certainly have been well-placed for him to use during the handover of Harrods, and was intended as a temporary house pending their move further away from London. The house was kept on for some time after he retired and was used by successive members of the family as a town house.
All of the houses in Evelyn Terrace are built in the red-brick, Anglo-Dutch, Domestic Revival style typical of the area. It was part of a new build at the time; constructed in 1886 and 1887. The name of this block of houses was changed later and 1 Evelyn Terrace became 31 Evelyn Gardens. The floor plans for 31–44 Evelyn Gardens and a photograph of Evelyn Gardens in 1990 appear on British History Online.
Large as these houses may seem by modern standards, the houses in Evelyn Gardens were modest by comparison with those previously built in nearby De Vere Gardens, which did not sell so well, or the later Italianate houses in Onslow Gardens and the rest of Cranley Gardens. They had a relatively narrow frontage (21ft) and three main storeys. Rents ranged between £170 and £210 per annum (about £15–20,000 today).
Charles Digby and his family were the first occupants of No. 31, and they occupied the house between 1888 and 1894, although by the latter date most of the family were living elsewhere. Charles was certainly living there as the process of selling Harrods began.
As well as the London house, Charles also took on a seaside property, Allerford House in Allerford, near Selworthy on the north Somerset coast. This cannot have been a random choice and I suspect the family must have holidayed in the area prior to the purchase. This theory is supported to some extent by the story about Herbert Kent and Kent’s Way, included earlier in this chapter. Herbert was offered a job by Charles Digby and joined Harrods from his home in Allerford in 1887. As Charles Digby did not take over Allerford House until 1888, he must have known Herbert from previous visits.
Allerford is a village located within the Exmoor National Park, and is part of the parish of Selworthy, 1 mile from the coast, and 4 miles west of Minehead. It is very picturesque and appears in the Domesday Book as ‘Alresford – forda Ralph de Limesy Mill’. The village has many thatched Exmoor cottages and was used for the filming of Lorna Doone. The higher ground in north Allerford would have had some splendid views of Porlock Bay to the north. One of the village’s main attractions is the much photographed Packhorse Bridge. Built as a crossing over the River Aller, it is thought to have been constructed in the eighteenth century.
Allerford House dates from the sixteenth–seventeenth century, but was enlarged in the late eighteenth century and is typically Georgian, with a symmetrical three-storey, three-bay frontage. It was the childhood home of Admiral John Moresby (1830–1922), who explored the coastline of New Guinea – Port Moresby, the capital city of Papua New Guinea, was named after him. The 1911 census, which gives the number of rooms in a property, shows that apart from minor rooms, it had twelve rooms. The house was initially acquired by Charles Digby as a holiday home and was used as an alternative to the London house for a few years The house was extensively refurbished in recent years and now has six bedrooms, four bathrooms and two staff flats..
A postcard was shown to me by Jean Pitt, granddaughter of Fanny, Charles and Caroline’s eldest daughter, and her husband, Rennie Conder. It was written by Rennie to ‘Miss Conder’, one of his daughters, in Eastbourne on 8 May 1916. He wrote:
I bought this from old Mrs Chapple of Allerford. She then soon recognised me quite well. You can just see half of Hill Cottage right in the middle of the picture. It is simply lovely here this evening. Love from Father.
The postcard suggests the family had a longer relationship with Allerford, and that the children and their families used Hill Cottage at an earlier date. Rennie knew the shopkeeper Mrs Chapple, and she can be found in the 1911 census, five years earlier, when she was the 49-year-old post office assistant.
Jean’s mother, Margery, was born in 1890, so she would have been very young at the time that Allerford House was in use, and this memory must have referred to holidays in the area after that time, perhaps at Hill House.
Allerford was not an easy place to get to. Road travel would have been almost impossible from London, and the family must have used the train. The Great Western Railway or GWR – called by some ‘God’s Wonderful Railway’ and by others the ‘Great Way Round’ – was the holiday line taking people to English and Bristol Channel resorts in the West Country as well as the far south-west of England, like Torquay in Devon, Minehead in Somerset and Newquay and St Ives in Cornwall. There were direct services from London Paddington to Taunton, and then a change was needed on to the Minehead Railway line which terminated at that town. The Minehead Railway was itself absorbed into the GWR in 1897.
The 5-mile coach trip to Allerford would have been reasonably easy, travelling along a fairly flat section of what is now the A39, rather than up or down along the very steep hills in the area which are west of Allerford.
With his housing requirements sorted out, Charles Digby would have been ready to sort out the sale of the shop.
Whatever Charles Digby’s reasons for retiring at this stage of his life, retire he did. In November 1889, Charles Digby sold out and Harrods was floated as a limited liability company.
Tim Dale tells us that Edgar Cohen, whom Charles Digby was purported to have met on the bus prior to the fire, and who had allegedly lent him the fare and helped organise the recovery, advised him on the sale. This part of the Cohen story can certainly be corroborated. Cohen bought the business and floated it, advising Charles Digby to take his money in shares. Charles replied, ‘If I sell I retire. If I own shares I shall worry about the business, which will not be retirement.’ This was a decision he came later to regret.
It is said that the price Charles Digby received was £120,000, probably about £10 million by today’s prices. When Charles Digby did eventually at a later date buy founder shares, he had to buy in at a much higher price. The prospectus is printed in Tim Dale’s book and the original has survived. It is available online as an advertisement in newspapers in November 1889, including the Morning Post and Western Daily Press, and on Find My Past and British Newspapers Online.
Applications were invited to be received before Tuesday, 26 November 1889. The prospectus lists the directors, none of whom are related to the family, the solicitors, and the bankers. Edgar Cohen did not appear in the list of directors. Six years later, a newspaper advertisement for a new sale of preference shares showed Cohen was by that time a director. (Of note, the auditors were Messrs. Deloitte, a well-known name to this day.)
Part of the 1889 prospectus follows:
HARROD’S STORES, LIMITED
CAPITAL – £141,000,
DIVIDED INTO
140,000 Ordinary Shares and 1,400 Founders’ Shares of £1 each
After payment in each year of a dividend at the rate of 8 per cent on the Ordinary Shares, the surplus profits, subject to the provision of a reserve fund, will be divisible in equal moieties between the holders of the Ordinary and Founders’ Shares.
The whole of the Founders’ Shares and £75,000 of the Ordinary Shares have
already been subscribed at par, in accordance with the terms of the prospectus, and will be allotted in full, and subscriptions are now invited at par for the balance of the Ordinary Shares payable as follows:
5s on Application, 15s on Allotment
PROSPECTUS
This Company is formed to take over, carry on, and extend the well-known Harrod’s Store, in the Brompton Road.
The business, which was originally established by the father of Mr C.D. Harrod, the present Vendor, has steadily and of late years rapidly developed; the sales for the year ended Good Friday 1889, amounted to £492,548, and except for the state of Mr Harrod’s health, which makes this step imperative, the opportunity of acquiring this business would not have presented itself.
The Company acquires the valuable and extensive leasehold premises in the Brompton Road, which are chiefly held for an unexpired term of 47 years, at the aggregate moderate rent of £1,635 a year; also the extensive warehouses on the east side of Queen’s Gardens, Richmond Gardens and New Court, embracing a large area. These premises, a portion of which are sublet at about £400 per annum, are not only sufficiently commodious to carry on the present business, but afford simple accommodation for a large increase in the volume of trade which may confidently be looked for.
The Stores are admirably situated, having an extensive frontage to a most important thoroughfare, and adjacent to perhaps the largest residential neighbourhood of London.
Mr Harrod’s business is mainly in provisions and articles of daily household use, and not, therefore, liable to the fluctuations attending a business which is subject to the influences of fashion.
The books of the Vendor have been examined by Messrs. Deloitte, Dever, Griffiths & Co., the well-known Accountants; and in their report … showed … net profits for last year £17,244.
The turnover for the current year has again increased by over £400 a week, and, with the evidence of increasing trade before them, the Directors consider that an annual net profit of £20,000 may soon be anticipated … suffice to pay the 8 per cent dividend on the Ordinary Shares …
The price to be paid by the Company for the entire properties, including plant, machinery, horses, vans, harness, fixtures, fittings, furniture of every description, the extensive leasehold, premises above mentioned, and the goodwill, is £100,000, while the stock is to be taken over at cost …
The business is acquired from 2 December, and from that date until taken over it will be carried on by the Vendor for the benefit and on account of the Company.
Arrangements have been made with the Vendor’s present Manager, Mr Smart, by which his services as Manager have been secured to the Company for a period of seven years …
Mr Smart was mentioned earlier in the 1884 newspaper article as ‘Manager of the new First Floor or Warehouse Floor’, and later as vice chairman at the 1885 annual dinner:
… No promotion money has or will be paid. The purchase is made direct from Mr Harrod, and the Company will have the very unusual advantage of commencing business without having its undertaking weighted with the profits of an intermediate Vendor …
James Clancy’s article of 1923 talks about the period leading up to the sale of Harrods, and immediately afterwards, inevitably with details of the accounting process:
In course of time the Chartered Accountants came along, and we had instructions to commence dissecting the debits. This was the commencement of the Dissecting Dept – one clerk. Shortly after this the Store was turned into a Liability Company.
The extra work meant more Staff for the Office. The Governor gave up the Bought Ledger, and engaged Bought Ledger, Town ledger and Mail Order Clerks.
At this time the coming of Lady Clerks commenced, Miss Fowle being the first. [There is evidence she had started earlier, in 1885, during Charles Digby’s time.]
The starting of the Company was immediately successful. The trade increased so much the Counting House could not cope with it, and got into a hopeless muddle. The clerical staff was considerably increased, some working all night, but to no purpose, until that strong man came along [the late Sir Richard], when the new System began to assume signs of success, which carried the Good Ship into Calm Waters.
This account does not match completely other accounts of what happened after the start of the company, for things did not go well for the store under Smart’s management. Mr Mercer also discussed the same period in his article. It certainly sounds as everything was not so well ordered as previously:
For some years there was no change, except slightly earlier closing.
In 1891 [he may mean 1889] Mr Harrod turned the business into ‘Harrods Stores, Ltd’. Mr Smart was appointed general manager, having been in charge of the hardware section for some years. He was a fine handsome man, but, I think, lacking the necessary temperament of a tactful G.M.
Having some clerical work to do for C.D.H., my office consisted of – a couple of cwt cube sugar boxes covered with brown paper, and on this pretentious desk I wrote quite a number of ‘applications’ for shares, including one for myself. Probably some are held to-day by those lucky applicants.
Soon after these events ‘the ship began to roll’, to use a nautical expression. The feeling of safety was replaced by one of uncertainty and business began to suffer in consequence.
Following a difference of opinion with the general manager one Thursday I was told to take my money, and that evening was paid accordingly by Mr Strutt, chief cashier, who seemed astonished at such a turn of policy.
I had been told to see Mr Smart on the following morning, and turned up – at eleven a.m., having been to Kensington Stores, the predecessors of Cadby Hall, to see about a job.
This interview with Harrods general manager resulted in my receiving another week’s pay, in addition to an increase in salary, as compensation.
Things were getting somewhat mixed up in the Counting House owing to a new system, and accounts had got muddled with P.O.D.’s to such an extent that no accounts were rendered for a fortnight.
The chief clerk was getting sixpence an hour to stay all night, and after better monetary inducement by Mr Oxboro, the chief accountant, I put in a couple of nights, i.e., in continuation of day work and we managed to straighten things out.
The coming of Mr Richard Burbidge was the saving of a nasty situation and he, followed by Mr A.J. Naughton as chief accountant, soon put us on a sounder basis, as they brought many items of the system introduced by the late Wm. Whiteley, that pioneer of solid West End business methods.
Omitted from this article was the last involvement of Charles Harrod’s family in the store. As business and profits fell after the sale, the board of directors dismissed William Smart as manager. His seven-year contract may have been expensive to terminate. They asked Charles Digby to return and run the shop until a new manager could be found, which it is said he did for a further eighteen months. The profits for 1890 had fallen by 27 per cent to £12,479.
The new directors had no detailed knowledge of retail, which is presumably why they fell back on Charles Digby – in addition they must have considered the fact that his presence would steady the ship and attract old customers back. Harrods archives gave me access to a transcript of the company secretary’s letter to Charles Digby, dated 7 November 1890, taken from the minutes of the board meeting of that day:
Dear Sir:
My Directors having dispensed with the services of Mr Smart as General Manager as per the enclosed copy of notice, they will feel greatly obliged by your attending and assisting in carrying on the business of this Company until such time as they can make other arrangements. I am especially requested by my Directors to thank you in anticipation for your valuable assistance.
I am Dear Sir,
Yours obediently,
Edwin Howell, Secretary
The unpublished story by Gilbert Frankau gives a more fanciful, romantic and unsubstantiated account of the events. This extract starts with Charles Digby in Selworthy, north Devon, where he
had moved in 1890:
And down to Selworthy in Somerset – at least according to the legend, for all records of those early days except Richard Burbidge’s diary have been destroyed – goes Edgar Cohen, bearing Newton’s S.O.S. Once again, the sober historian must refuse to confirm a legend. For all we know, Charles Harrod may still have been living in Evelyn Gardens. The only certainty is that he responded to that S.O.S instantaneously, thus providing us with the final proof of his integrity, of his sense of honour, of his respect for his father’s name.
As a rich man, he could easily have refused without giving a reason – or pleaded, with complete justification, the state of his health – or pretended to hesitate before demanding an extortionate salary.
Frankau wrote that there is ‘a living witness to the state of affairs the governor found that first morning [i.e. when C.D.H. returned to the store]’, and he seems to be using information from this eyewitness when he paints a colourful picture of no-nonsense Mr Harrod sorting the place out, paying bills, chasing creditors, tidying the horses harnesses etc.. Charles Digby had a look at the two new departments, one for boots and one for hosiery:
Harrod found them too small, their stocks second rate and their buyers little to his liking. He gave both the rough edge of his tongue; and sacked a poultryman, whom he heard being impolite to a customer, on his way back to the office.
He worked all through September, with the strain now beginning to tell; all through October, with one witness after another reporting to Alfred Newton, ‘Search parties to look for the old man, whom the assistants often find collapsed and insensible when they come in of a morning’; and all through November; right on until the last of the Christmas stocks had been ordered and that eight per cent dividend promised by the prospectus was as good as certain for the first thirteen months’ trading of the new company.
The Jewel of Knightsbridge Page 17